3 ms·

I get that it's a clickbait headline, but he doesn't seem to be making any coherent point. Somehow billionaires, debt holders, etc will get wiped out, companie

I get that it's a clickbait headline, but he doesn't seem to be making any coherent point. Somehow billionaires, debt holders, etc will get wiped out, companies will go bankrupt and protect their employee pensions (what are those?), and then they will reemerge being partially owned by their employees. > "“It would be better for the Fed to have given half a million to every man, woman and child in the United States,” he said." What now? A $165 Trillion bailout?

enitihas 7y ago
Who needs math if you can appeal to emotions.
- viklove 7y ago
  I think you're the ones letting emotions get in your way. The whole point is to dilute the wealth in this country to bring million/billionaires down to the commoner's level. Then let society build its way back up, because you'll end up with something much different when the average American has the same purchasing power as the wealthiest American. Right now if you want to start a business, you have to get "approval" from a wealthy American in the form of an investment or loan. If you remove this "approval" process, you will end up with a true free marketplace of ideas, where everyone can try something out without needing to ask someone's permission first. More importantly, demand won't only be coming from the top down. Instead of billions of dollars going into acquisitions of valueless corporations like WeWork, billions will be spent on making American's lives better. A dollar is a coupon you can use to redeem for some amount of human productive output. Instead of letting 1% of society decide how we use this productive output, it should be a decision for all Americans to make (by spending dollars, which they haven't had the opportunity to do in the last 2 decades).
totalZero 7y ago
The number is off, but it doesn't matter. I think he was being hyperbolical, but we can consider the idea of bailout to people vs bailout to corporations anyway. Give each family 60k, and you cover them for a year at the same cost of the bailout that actually occurred. In that scenario.... Groceries get bought. Bills get paid. Essential businesses make money, which means they get compensated for being useful. That's a good thing. Elderly employees who don't feel comfortable working, can quit their jobs. We have grown so accustomed to rampant corporate feudalism that it almost feels un-American to question the collapse of companies that are not essential to the health and well-being of our citizens or our government. It feels wrong to allow the financial losses of a billionaire who knowingly bought a risk asset, only because we have been told for years that normal people need billionaires to create our jobs for us. Let them take it in the face for once. Risks have a downside factor. We shouldn't eliminate that just because rich people want to maintain their riches.
- EGreg 7y ago
  I will go even further. Why not give everyone a UBI and let things shift towards strengthening necessities all the time? People who make less money have a higher Marginal Propensity to Consume necessities. That would correctly distribute what’s needed in society by actual level of need. It would also automatically adjust to shortages etc. I think as entrepreneurs we can all say that investors put in $$ when they see demand for your products and services, and not because they got a tax break!

enitihas 7y ago

Who needs math if you can appeal to emotions.

viklove 7y ago
I think you're the ones letting emotions get in your way. The whole point is to dilute the wealth in this country to bring million/billionaires down to the commoner's level. Then let society build its way back up, because you'll end up with something much different when the average American has the same purchasing power as the wealthiest American. Right now if you want to start a business, you have to get "approval" from a wealthy American in the form of an investment or loan. If you remove this "approval" process, you will end up with a true free marketplace of ideas, where everyone can try something out without needing to ask someone's permission first. More importantly, demand won't only be coming from the top down. Instead of billions of dollars going into acquisitions of valueless corporations like WeWork, billions will be spent on making American's lives better. A dollar is a coupon you can use to redeem for some amount of human productive output. Instead of letting 1% of society decide how we use this productive output, it should be a decision for all Americans to make (by spending dollars, which they haven't had the opportunity to do in the last 2 decades).

totalZero 7y ago

The number is off, but it doesn't matter. I think he was being hyperbolical, but we can consider the idea of bailout to people vs bailout to corporations anyway. Give each family 60k, and you cover them for a year at the same cost of the bailout that actually occurred. In that scenario.... Groceries get bought. Bills get paid. Essential businesses make money, which means they get compensated for being useful. That's a good thing. Elderly employees who don't feel comfortable working, can quit their jobs. We have grown so accustomed to rampant corporate feudalism that it almost feels un-American to question the collapse of companies that are not essential to the health and well-being of our citizens or our government. It feels wrong to allow the financial losses of a billionaire who knowingly bought a risk asset, only because we have been told for years that normal people need billionaires to create our jobs for us. Let them take it in the face for once. Risks have a downside factor. We shouldn't eliminate that just because rich people want to maintain their riches.

EGreg 7y ago
I will go even further. Why not give everyone a UBI and let things shift towards strengthening necessities all the time? People who make less money have a higher Marginal Propensity to Consume necessities. That would correctly distribute what’s needed in society by actual level of need. It would also automatically adjust to shortages etc. I think as entrepreneurs we can all say that investors put in $$ when they see demand for your products and services, and not because they got a tax break!